[enum-wg] ITU: debate over User-ENUM administration

>>>>> "Christian" == Christian de Larrinaga <cdel at firsthand.net> writes:

    Christian> The scenario suggested by the Mr. Kisrawi has the DoC
    Christian> striking off .arpa or replacing the IAB authority over
    Christian> .arpa and the existing delegations in .arpa not being
    Christian> inherited by any successor "owner". This is a
    Christian> remarkable plot.  Perhaps it could happen

Whether it could or couldn't happen is not the point. The problem is
some governments are very uneasy that they do not have an understood
legal framework for the internet -- contracts, treaties, etc -- as
they do for other forms of communication like post and telephone.
Without that framework, they feel their national interests are not
adequately safeguarded. This hasn't been helped by seeing some
countries lose control over their TLDs. The next problem is that ICANN
is a US company subject to US jurisdiction, not an offshoot of an
international organisation. A fundamental principle of international
law is the national resources of one state cannot be under the control
of another. The wrangling over e164.arpa at SG2 is a scale model of
that larger concern.

Please note too that SG2 is largely a forum for governments and
regulators. They're used to dealing with regulations, laws and
contracts. The culture of the internet -- benign anarchy, liaison
statements with organisations that legally do not exist, etc -- is
alien to them. And perhaps frightening for some.

The point Mr. Kiswari and others is making is not that DoC could pull
the plug on .arpa. It's that if this happened, what redress do
governments have? Who do they complain to and what power does that
body have to resolve the issue? Since there are no contracts or
treaties... 


BTW Christian, the mail server you're using is broken. It's
gratuitously mangling email addresses:
	"enum-wg at ripe.net"@smtp.nildram.co.uk
	<"sob at harvard.edu"@smtp.nildram.co.uk>
Could you please get this fixed?